‘Domestic workers employed as members of the service staff of foreign diplomatic missions in the United Kingdom were entitled to bring proceedings asserting their employment rights against the employer state, in claims including unfair dismissal and breach of working time provisions, and such claims were not barred by the doctrine of state immunity pursuant to provisions in the State Immunity Act 1978.’

‘A single employee responsible for the management of a company’s property portfolio in the Netherlands was an “organised grouping of employees”, covered by UK employment law protections when the service she provided was outsourced to another company.’

‘An experienced doctor, who has questioned the official explanation for the death of weapons expert David Kelly, was dismissed by text and email while on a family holiday after he blew the whistle about alleged discrepancies in the dispensing of strong painkillers at an army base.’

‘If you are an advisor who only occasionally dabbles with tax issues in settlements for fear of having to delve into murky tax law, take note of a recent decision providing a lucid summary of the relevant principles. The case is also a cautionary tale for claimants challenging tax assessments as the claimant’s unsuccessful challenge before the First-Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) resulted in a tax bill larger than the one sent to him by HMRC. If Oti-Obhihara [2011] IRLR 386 and Orthet v Vince Cain [2005] ICR 374 ring a distant bell from advising on settlements past, they should now be retuned to the sound of alarm bells as the FTT in Moorthy v HMRC [2014] UKFTT 834 (TC) has doubted their correctness.’

‘Was there gross misconduct? If there was, did it justify dismissal? Those were issues before Judge Eady QC in Burdett v Aviva Employment Services Ltd, UKEAT/0439/13/JOJ, a case concerned with both unfair dismissal and discrimination arising from disability. The employee had committed assaults in the workplace. However, this was because of his disability. He suffered from a paranoid schizophrenic illness. The ET was judged to have been in error in finding gross misconduct. They had failed to engage with the question of blameworthiness. The ET was also found to have been in error in assuming that dismissal will necessarily fall within the range of reasonable responses in a gross misconduct case.’

‘An employment tribunal which decided to carry out its own internet research, apparently to help a litigant in person, has been condemned by Mr Justice Langstaff, president of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).’

‘“Why didn’t anyone in the know say something about it?” That’s the natural reaction of the public when some shocking new scandal – financial wrongdoing, patient neglect, child abuse – comes to light. The question highlights the role of the whistleblower. He or she can play a vital role in ensuring that something is done about activity which is illegal or dangerous. But the price which the whistleblower pays may be high – ostracism by colleagues, victimisation by the employer, dismissal, informal blacklisting by other employers who fear taking on a “troublemaker”.’

‘An employee who was working or based abroad at the time of his dismissal did not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of section 94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which provided for the right not to be unfairly dismissed, or section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999, which provided for the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing, subject to the exception that he might fall within that jurisdiction if he had much stronger connections both with Great Britain and with British employment law than with any other system of law. In determining that question a comparison of the merits of the local employment law of the employee’s workplace at the time of his dismissal with that of the employment law applicable in Great Britain was not relevant or required.’

‘When Lord Hoffmann gave the only substantive judgment of the House of Lords in Lawson v. Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250 it was no doubt envisaged that the knotty question of territorial jurisdiction of s.94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA 1996”)– the right not to be unfairly dismissed – would be resolved once and for all. It was, after all, the first time that their Lordships had considered the question, and they did so unanimously in the context of three co-joined appeals.’

‘The point at which the new employer becomes responsible for the workers who have been transferred under TUPE rules is a question of fact, not the wishes or intentions of the parties, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has confirmed.’

‘A change in the working location of somebody who has changed employer through TUPE will only be grounds for a constructive dismissal claim if that change is “substantial” and causes “material detriment” to the worker.’

‘CPR r 31.22 applied to restrict the use of documents disclosed pursuant to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 and, their replacement, the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.’

‘Haringey council has had to pay out more than £600,000 to its former children’s services boss Sharon Shoesmith in compensation for unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, and pension contributions, according to reports.’

‘Employees who were required to work in a different location after their work was outsourced were not exempted from legal protections aimed at such workers under pre-2014 rules, the UK’s employment appeal tribunal (EAT) has ruled.’

‘Under Art 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950, freedom of association is protected. In Redfearn v UK it was held that the UK government had violated Mr Redfearn’s Art 11 right as the UK had not taken reasonable measures to protect employees such as him from dismissal on grounds of political affiliation. The government’s response, although following a suggestion of the court, could mean that the wider issues in Redfearn may yet have to be visited again.’

Classifieds

Events

Users’ Comments

“It is easy to miss legal news on a crowded net. The Inner Temple Library’s Current Awareness team don’t…. a first class news and awareness service. Essential.”— Charon QC, http://charonqc.wordpress.com/